Henry Zongaro

Peter @pshipton, having looked at another problem with ExpressionsSimplification (#15534), I think it might be safer to push this out to the next release rather than trying to rush in...

@connglli, regarding the test you provided in [your comment of June 15](https://github.com/eclipse-openj9/openj9/issues/15306#issuecomment-1156867904), it appears that that is a different problem. The incorrect output produced with that test can be avoided...

[Link for starting a grinder run](https://server/job/Grinder/parambuild/?TARGET=ValueTypeTestsJIT_1&SDK_RESOURCE=upstream&TEST_FLAG=&UPSTREAM_TEST_JOB_NAME=&DOCKER_REQUIRED=false&ACTIVE_NODE_TIMEOUT=&EXTRA_DOCKER_ARGS=&VENDOR_TEST_DIRS=functional&TKG_OWNER_BRANCH=adoptium%3Amaster&OPENJ9_SYSTEMTEST_OWNER_BRANCH=eclipse%3Amaster&PLATFORM=aarch64_linux&GENERATE_JOBS=true&KEEP_REPORTDIR=false&PERSONAL_BUILD=false&ADOPTOPENJDK_REPO=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fadoptium%2Faqa-tests.git&LABEL=&EXTRA_OPTIONS=&CUSTOMIZED_SDK_URL=https%3A%2F%2Fna.artifactory.swg-devops.com%2Fartifactory%2Fsys-rt-generic-local%2Fhyc-runtimes-jenkins.swg-devops.com%2FBuild_JDKnext_aarch64_linux_valhalla_Personal%2F5%2FOpenJ9-JDKnext-aarch64_linux_valhalla-20220211-132547.tar.gz+https%3A%2F%2Fna.artifactory.swg-devops.com%2Fartifactory%2Fsys-rt-generic-local%2Fhyc-runtimes-jenkins.swg-devops.com%2FBuild_JDKnext_aarch64_linux_valhalla_Personal%2F5%2Ftest-images.tar.gz&ADOPTOPENJDK_BRANCH=master&LIGHT_WEIGHT_CHECKOUT=true&ARTIFACTORY_SERVER=na.artifactory.swg-devops&KEEP_WORKSPACE=false&CURL_OPTS=&JDK_VERSION=Valhalla&USER_CREDENTIALS_ID=83181e25-eea4-4f55-8b3e-e79615733226&ITERATIONS=10&VENDOR_TEST_REPOS=git%40github.ibm.com%3Aruntimes%2Ftest.git&JCK_GIT_BRANCH=master&JDK_REPO=git%40github.com%3Aibmruntimes%2Fopenj9-openjdk-jdk.valuetypes.git&OPENJ9_BRANCH=master&OPENJ9_SHA=48aad48d28b523ec3b05554886ca8292008ec270&JCK_GIT_REPO=&RELEASE_TAG=&VENDOR_TEST_BRANCHES=master&OPENJ9_REPO=git%40github.com%3Aeclipse%2Fopenj9.git&UPSTREAM_JOB_NAME=&CLOUD_PROVIDER=&CUSTOM_TARGET=&DEBUG_IMAGES_REQUIRED=true&CODE_COVERAGE=false&VENDOR_TEST_SHAS=941a48aa82d6c3edfc81323879b2470abc0ec3f2&JDK_BRANCH=openj9&TEST_IMAGES_REQUIRED=true&LABEL_ADDITION=ci.project.openj9&UPSTREAM_TEST_JOB_NUMBER=&DOCKERIMAGE_TAG=&JDK_IMPL=openj9&TEST_TIME=&SSH_AGENT_CREDENTIAL=83181e25-eea4-4f55-8b3e-e79615733226&AUTO_DETECT=false&SLACK_CHANNEL=&DYNAMIC_COMPILE=false&ADOPTOPENJDK_SYSTEMTEST_OWNER_BRANCH=adoptium%3Amaster&CUSTOMIZED_SDK_URL_CREDENTIAL_ID=4e18ffe7-b1b1-4272-9979-99769b68bcc2&ARCHIVE_TEST_RESULTS=false&NUM_MACHINES=&TRSS_URL=http%3A%2F%2Ftrss1.fyre.ibm.com&BUILD_LIST=functional%2FValhalla%2Cfunctional%2Fcmdline_options_tester%2Cfunctional%2FcmdLineTests%2Fvaluetypeddrtests&USE_TESTENV_PROPERTIES=false&UPSTREAM_JOB_NUMBER=&STF_OWNER_BRANCH=adoptium%3Amaster&TIME_LIMIT=20&JVM_OPTIONS=&PARALLEL=None).

Rahil @r30shah, have you had any success reproducing this failure?

Peter @pshipton, as we haven't had success reproducing this yet, I'd suggest moving it out of the 0.35 release.

Taking a look. . . .

I was able to reproduce this 1/50 in a Grinder run with the nightly build from April 21 https://openj9-artifactory.osuosl.org/artifactory/ci-openj9/Build_JDK18_x86-64_windows_Nightly/56/OpenJ9-JDK18-x86-64_windows-20220421-202221.tar.gz - which was deleted from Artifactory within the past 24 hours....

Looking at the x86_64-linux failure mentioned in the [previous comment](#issuecomment-1136054416), the getStackTrace in operating on a NullPointerException that has this walkback field: ``` (kca) whatis 0x00007f42843a98e0 Obj - {[J}T (kca)...

Further update regarding the core file from the x86 Linux failure. The crash happens in [`getInlinedMethod`](https://github.com/eclipse-openj9/openj9/blob/799203e93bdfba0814e9b9b8594958a397d9d3c6/runtime/compiler/runtime/MethodMetaData.c#L2010-L2013) because `inlinedCallSite` is NULL. It looks like in this case it holds a pointer...

Peter mentioned in an [earlier comment](https://github.com/eclipse-openj9/openj9/issues/15066#issuecomment-1128035226) a Grinder run with `-Xjit` that failed 1/40. I believe that the way the options processing in the JIT works, specifying the jit option...